D&D 5E Assaying rules for 5E E6 (Revised)

[clearstream]

Level 7 is perfect from a capstone ability point of view : casters get level 4 spells, most martials get strong class features (Evasion + 4d6 sneak attack for the Rogue, Feral instinct for the Barbarian, second Martial archetype feature for the Fighter, etc.). If the player choose to multiclass, it will come with a cost.
Also level 7 is the exact halfway point in the second tiers of play and is the (very theorical) level wich allow the PC to do an epic battle against the strongest adults Dragons (for a game called D&D i believe it's an important symbolic feature).

My motives align with the discussion on stackexchange around where to cut off spells. For my purposes, 0th-3rd level feels good - characters can fly and fireball, and a few other wondrous things - while 4th-9th is above where I feel is ideal for ordinary spellcasting. There are lots of factors that come into and arise from this, so I'm not arguing that 4th is wrong, just that I'm aligned with those who feel drawn to 3rd.

Key spells that cuts out include banishment, divination, dimension door, greater invisibility and polymorph.

From my POV, E6 is all about actual play not theorical perspectives, a sort of ockham razor mindest.
And what we all know is : 90% of D&D Games Stop By Level 10
By playing E5/E6/E7 games with D&D 5 what you will face 90% of the time is a campaign coming to an end after the E(X) + 3-5 feats.

In my first 5th campaign, characters reached 15th level. In my current they have reached 11th and look likely to reach 12th. On the basis of two steps of post-6th advancement equals +1 level, it must be 8-10 feats.

And let's be honest, everyone will take Lucky so what you'll really see is level X PC + Lucky + 2-4 feats.
And then you will start a new campaign.

We'd see a lot of Lucky, GWM, PAM, XBE, SS, maybe Tough. The racial feats are quite strong so probably one of them. It's the casters I worry about more. After Lucky and War Caster or Resilience, what? Sorcerers could take the TCoE feat... there's not much else that is really exciting to pick from.

In the end, with feats in 5th edition, I honestly believe that the campaign would be good for perhaps one rev, and then the mechanical interest is exhausted. That's not a goal of this design: it's intended to be evergreen.

Also you can easily break 5e feats into smaller increments : give Lucy one reroll after the other (turning it into 3 smaller feats) or split Tough in two "+X PV" mini-feats.
If you want to allow you PC to have access to level (X+1) - 11 class feature, build custom feats for them on a case-by-case basis

Another goal is that this be available to a wider audience. So I am not thinking of having to build custom feats on a case by case basis, but rather drawing on the diversity already available in class and sub-class features. I can see the appeal of fully customisable characters, yet for me that isn't really D&D. It comes strongly through e.g. in the surveys that have asked players - what makes D&D - that class-based advancement is central to D&D. So my goals are to craft the philosophies of E6 - the game-feel of E6 (but not meta-game feel) - into class-based progression.

I'm not disregarding or disliking your suggestions. They're fun and I can see the attraction. Only trying to indicate where my motives lie and what I hope to deliver for the community. Well, one other thing, for me E6 really is more the philosophy than the mechanics. I look all the way back at the articles that inspired it, and that is what I want to render.

 

[Rune]

And what we all know is : 90% of D&D Games Stop By Level 10

Ah, but the question is: Do most players stop playing by level 10 because higher levels are never well-supported, or do WotC never support high-level play well because most players stop by then?

The answer is probably Yes.

 

[Islayre d'Argolh]

My motives align with the discussion on stackexchange around where to cut off spells. For my purposes, 0th-3rd level feels good - characters can fly and fireball, and a few other wondrous things - while 4th-9th is above where I feel is ideal for ordinary spellcasting. There are lots of factors that come into and arise from this, so I'm not arguing that 4th is wrong, just that I'm aligned with those who feel drawn to 3rd.

Key spells that cuts out include banishment, divination, dimension door, greater invisibility and polymorph.


In my first 5th campaign, characters reached 15th level. In my current they have reached 11th and look likely to reach 12th. On the basis of two steps of post-6th advancement equals +1 level, it must be 8-10 feats.


We'd see a lot of Lucky, GWM, PAM, XBE, SS, maybe Tough. The racial feats are quite strong so probably one of them. It's the casters I worry about more. After Lucky and War Caster or Resilience, what? Sorcerers could take the TCoE feat... there's not much else that is really exciting to pick from.

In the end, with feats in 5th edition, I honestly believe that the campaign would be good for perhaps one rev, and then the mechanical interest is exhausted. That's not a goal of this design: it's intended to be evergreen.


Another goal is that this be available to a wider audience. So I am not thinking of having to build custom feats on a case by case basis, but rather drawing on the diversity already available in class and sub-class features. I can see the appeal of fully customisable characters, yet for me that isn't really D&D. It comes strongly through e.g. in the surveys that have asked players - what makes D&D - that class-based advancement is central to D&D. So my goals are to craft the philosophies of E6 - the game-feel of E6 (but not meta-game feel) - into class-based progression.

I'm not disregarding or disliking your suggestions. They're fun and I can see the attraction. Only trying to indicate where my motives lie and what I hope to deliver for the community. Well, one other thing, for me E6 really is more the philosophy than the mechanics. I look all the way back at the articles that inspired it, and that is what I want to render.

Playing E7 is a personnal choice, i will not argue against E5 or E6, both level caps are perfectly valid.
I'll just say that i agree with you with some problematic 4th level spells but i just banned the spells... Not the entire spell level

For the rest, and with all due respect to your hardwork, it seems to me that you're looking for a problem your already-made solution can solve.

The strength of E6 was it's simplicity : until 6th level it's D&D 3, then it's one feat every 5 000 XP.
I strongly believe it works the same and just fine with 5e : D&D 5 until level 5/6/7 then only ASI/Feats.

 

[TwoSix]

We'd see a lot of Lucky, GWM, PAM, XBE, SS, maybe Tough. The racial feats are quite strong so probably one of them. It's the casters I worry about more. After Lucky and War Caster or Resilience, what? Sorcerers could take the TCoE feat... there's not much else that is really exciting to pick from.

I'm certainly not against your demilevel proposal. But I do think feats can work, as well. I mean, I think part of the attraction of the feat method is that you can get a lot of feats that would normally be considered lower-tier, but are still useful and can be used to define your character more strongly without being obviously synergetic power choices. A warrior could grab multiple fighting styles. A wizard could be a chef. The rogue may want to also be a healer, etc.

I do think introducing a small selection of E(x) specific feats, that allow you to grab subclass or class features that would fit within the E(x) milieu, is certainly a good idea, though.

 

[clearstream]

Playing E7 is a personnal choice, i will not argue against E5 or E6, both level caps are perfectly valid.
I'll just say that i agree with you with some problematic 4th level spells but i just banned the spells... Not the entire spell level

For the rest, and with all due respect to your hardwork, it seems to me that you're looking for a problem your already-made solution can solve.

The strength of E6 was it's simplicity : until 6th level it's D&D 3, then it's one feat every 5 000 XP.
I strongly believe it works the same and just fine with 5e : D&D 5 until level 5/6/7 then only ASI/Feats.

It doesn't seem right to say that free-form advancement can be a solution for class-based advancement. The problem spaces intersect, but class-based is (for my aims) a constraint.

I'd moot that play at my table will deliver the strongest evidence for or against.

 

[Islayre d'Argolh]

I do think introducing a small selection of E(x) specific feats, that allow you to grab subclass or class features that would fit within the E(x) milieu, is certainly a good idea, though.

Exactly.

@clearstream if your goal is to present some class-based advancement to the community, i suggest you to think about classe/archetype based capstone feats. It will be a lot more close to the original E6 philosophy.

 

[clearstream]

I'm certainly not against your demilevel proposal. But I do think feats can work, as well. I mean, I think part of the attraction of the feat method is that you can get a lot of feats that would normally be considered lower-tier, but are still useful and can be used to define your character more strongly without being obviously synergetic power choices. A warrior could grab multiple fighting styles. A wizard could be a chef. The rogue may want to also be a healer, etc.

I do think introducing a small selection of E(x) specific feats, that allow you to grab subclass or class features that would fit within the E(x) milieu, is certainly a good idea, though.

For sure, and in partial contradiction to my reply to @Islayre d'Argolh, were I to approach it with feats, I would design a few epic and meta-feats to satisfy specific needs. For example spell enhancements slots could easily be granted via a feat (and I think are, in some E6 variants).

I did think about translating class and subclass features en-masse into feats. A difficulty is that often they are balanced against the specific class, and could be very unbalanced if made accessible to another class. I like being able to give a class something that they have privileged access to. That can be done in feat requirements, but then I will have really designed an obfuscated class progression table.

 

[TwoSix]

For sure, and in partial contradiction to my reply to @Islayre d'Argolh, were I to approach it with feats, I would design a few epic and meta-feats to satisfy specific needs. For example spell enhancements slots could easily be granted via a feat (and I think are, in some E6 variants).

I did think about translating class and subclass features en-masse into feats. A difficulty is that often they are balanced against the specific class, and could be very unbalanced if made accessible to another class. I like being able to give a class something that they have privileged access to. That can be done in feat requirements, but then I will have really designed an obfuscated class progression table.

Fair points.

I guess a main question for me with demilevels is, if we know we want to keep HP somewhere in 40-70 range, restrict spell access to 3rd level, and keep prof bonus to +3 (maybe +4 with enough advancement?), what features from T2-T3 advancement would you want to keep accessible to the players? Is some kind of homogenous progression possible, or would each class need to be done a la carte?

 

[Dausuul]

My motives align with the discussion on stackexchange around where to cut off spells. For my purposes, 0th-3rd level feels good - characters can fly and fireball, and a few other wondrous things - while 4th-9th is above where I feel is ideal for ordinary spellcasting. There are lots of factors that come into and arise from this, so I'm not arguing that 4th is wrong, just that I'm aligned with those who feel drawn to 3rd.

Key spells that cuts out include banishment, divination, dimension door, greater invisibility and polymorph.

4th-level spells are borderline for me. I actually like that polymorph is allowed--turning people into animals is such an iconic magical effect in myth and legend. The others I'm on the fence about. Except divination, but that one falls into a category of divination spells that I ban regardless of level (open-ended spells that provide infallible information).

5th-level spells are where I go from "maybe too much" to "definitely too much." That's where long-range teleportation and raising the dead* come online, two effects that can totally reshape a campaign and a setting. It also includes scrying, wall of force, wall of stone, etc.

*Okay, technically revivify can raise the dead; but the 1-minute window makes it more like emergency medical treatment. If a 5th-level cleric is not physically on the spot when you die, you're out of luck. It does not have nearly the same impact on the world at large as the 10-day window of raise dead.

 

[squibbles]

[...] 5th has about 75 feats. 3.5ed had hundreds by the time E6 was created. The granularity and class coverage (feats given classes care about) is entirely different, for example meta-magic was all contained in feats in 3.5ed, whereas casters have a short list in 5th, many of which are well-known to be low in value.

[...] you can easily break 5e feats into smaller increments : give Lucy one reroll after the other (turning it into 3 smaller feats) or split Tough in two "+X PV" mini-feats.

[...] If you want to allow you PC to have access to level (X+1) - 11 class feature, build custom feats for them on a case-by-case basis

I'm certainly not against your demilevel proposal. But I do think feats can work, as well. I mean, I think part of the attraction of the feat method is that you can get a lot of feats that would normally be considered lower-tier, but are still useful and can be used to define your character more strongly without being obviously synergetic power choices. A warrior could grab multiple fighting styles. A wizard could be a chef. The rogue may want to also be a healer, etc. [...]

So, I've been giving suggestions based on the original demi-levels post thus far (which I think works fine).

But if one were to use feats, it'd probably be a good idea to break them down from 5e's paradigm quite a lot.

Fortunately, such things already exist. The D&D next playtest has a much more granular iteration of feats (as of playtest packet 7, anyway, which is the only version I have). However, I think the individual bullets in Treantmonk's feats variant would work even better; they are all quite small, are roughly equivalent, and there are about 110 of them.

Of course, as others have mentioned, you'd still probably want to create several additional class-gated feats that mimic the more compelling class and subclass features. Or maybe just require double the XP needed to get a feat to get the next level of class features after 6th--excluding HP, proficiency bonus progression, and spell slots--and allow this up to 10th or 11th level, depending on class.

...eh, just a half-baked thought